The Northwest Beanpole project was one of 4 multi-county telecommunications infrastructure projects funded under HB 99-1102, a 1999 Colorado legislative act commonly referred to as the "Beanpole Bill."

+

The Northwest Beanpole project was one of 4 multi-county telecommunications infrastructure projects funded under HB 99-1102, a 1999 Colorado legislative act commonly referred to as the "Beanpole Bill."

−

+

The $4.7 million Beanpole Project was a parallel effort to the implementation of the State's Multi-Use Network, the MNT. By design, the project was an effort to leverage the State's "anchor tenant" investment by aggregating and connecting public users (schools, local government, and hospitals) to extend the benefits of Colorado's statewide network infrastructure. Actual funding, with additional amounts from Energy and Mineral Impact funds, was noted to have been $5.3 million by a 2002 State audit. The funding was considered the first of two phases, with a $5 million second phase expected to follow in 2002 (and an estimate of $25 million in need, statewide). There were also three single county implementation grants and (over a period of years) eighteen assessment and planning grant recipients (representing 36 counties). Seven communities representing sixteen counties received implementation grants totaling about $4.6 million.

The $4.7 million Beanpole Project was a parallel effort to the implementation of the State's Multi-Use Network, the MNT. By design, the project was an effort to leverage the State's "anchor tenant" investment by aggregating and connecting public users (schools, local government, and hospitals) to extend the benefits of Colorado's statewide network infrastructure. Actual funding, with additional amounts from Energy and Mineral Impact funds, was noted to have been $5.3 million by a 2002 State audit. The funding was considered the first of two phases, with a $5 million second phase expected to follow in 2002 (and an estimate of $25 million in need, statewide). There were also three single county implementation grants and (over a period of years) eighteen assessment and planning grant recipients (representing 36 counties). Seven communities representing sixteen counties received implementation grants totaling about $4.6 million.

Line 22:

Line 19:

It is difficult to evaluate and compare outcomes of the Beanpole implementation communities in part because each implementation community dealt independently with the characteristic resources and setbacks of its own environment. Three criteria for evaluation of outcomes are

It is difficult to evaluate and compare outcomes of the Beanpole implementation communities in part because each implementation community dealt independently with the characteristic resources and setbacks of its own environment. Three criteria for evaluation of outcomes are

−

1) Was additional infrastructure built as part of the project to extend the reach of high-bandwidth connectivity in the communities?

+

#Was additional infrastructure built as part of the project to extend the reach of high-bandwidth connectivity in the communities?

−

+

#Has there been a measurable and lasting impact of this access on the communities?

−

2) Has there been a measurable and lasting impact of this access on the communities?

+

#Has this change been sustainable?

−

+

−

3) Has this change been sustainable?

+

For Northwest Colorado, as with many of the other implementation communities, the answers to all three criteria have been "yes."

For Northwest Colorado, as with many of the other implementation communities, the answers to all three criteria have been "yes."

Line 44:

Line 39:

As of September 2005, for example, only 19 of Colorado's 178 school districts were connected to the MNT and four of those were planning to switch to another provider in the fall of 2007. The MNT, however, is engaged in planning its future. The MNT 2005 Annual Report included a seven-item list of future plans:

As of September 2005, for example, only 19 of Colorado's 178 school districts were connected to the MNT and four of those were planning to switch to another provider in the fall of 2007. The MNT, however, is engaged in planning its future. The MNT 2005 Annual Report included a seven-item list of future plans:

−

1. Continue to make MNT access available to non-state agencies;

+

#Continue to make MNT access available to non-state agencies;

−

2. Convene [a] state-wide planning group to plan for the transition of the MNT. Migration from today's megabit per second networks to gigabit per second will be key;

+

#Convene [a] state-wide planning group to plan for the transition of the MNT. Migration from today's megabit per second networks to gigabit per second will be key;

−

3. Work with the Department of Local Affairs to be sure that all local governments have access at adequate bandwidth to meet minimum state standards;

+

#Work with the Department of Local Affairs to be sure that all local governments have access at adequate bandwidth to meet minimum state standards;

−

4. Aggressively support direct-connection to MNT from public sector fiber optic MANs (Municipal Area Networks);

+

#Aggressively support direct-connection to MNT from public sector fiber optic MANs (Municipal Area Networks);

6. Engineer the Core of the MNT to support the constant bit rate requirements of video and voice;

+

#Engineer the Core of the MNT to support the constant bit rate requirements of video and voice;

−

7. Expand the use of the MNT for voice applications

+

#Expand the use of the MNT for voice applications

+

The MNT and Qwest's CHSDN, its commercial parallel service, and MNT partner CenturyTel have had a significant impact on broadband access in Colorado. As of the MNT 2005 Annual Report, 85% of all county seats have one or more DSL providers associated with their ANAPs. Ten county seats, however, do not yet have DSL deployments paralleling the MNT's ATM services locally. These are: (for Qwest) Clear Creek, Elbert, Gilpin, Grand, Lake, Park, San Juan, Sedgwick, and teller counties; and (for CenturyTel) Baca and Bent counties.

The MNT and Qwest's CHSDN, its commercial parallel service, and MNT partner CenturyTel have had a significant impact on broadband access in Colorado. As of the MNT 2005 Annual Report, 85% of all county seats have one or more DSL providers associated with their ANAPs. Ten county seats, however, do not yet have DSL deployments paralleling the MNT's ATM services locally. These are: (for Qwest) Clear Creek, Elbert, Gilpin, Grand, Lake, Park, San Juan, Sedgwick, and teller counties; and (for CenturyTel) Baca and Bent counties.

−

Northwest Beanpole Project History

+

+

==Northwest Beanpole Project History==

+

The history of the regional planning for telecommunications development that led to and made possible the Northwest Colorado Beanpole Project is notable for its longevity and the breadth and steadfastness of its participation.

The history of the regional planning for telecommunications development that led to and made possible the Northwest Colorado Beanpole Project is notable for its longevity and the breadth and steadfastness of its participation.

Line 79:

Line 77:

The value of collaboration/aggregation of users and previous experience in a development project was recognized early. The 2000 report on the Technology Learning Grant and Revolving Loan Program (January 31, 2000) noted:

The value of collaboration/aggregation of users and previous experience in a development project was recognized early. The 2000 report on the Technology Learning Grant and Revolving Loan Program (January 31, 2000) noted:

−

Several of the larger projects had tremendous geographical scope. These led to the formation of alliances that will have a lasting legacy in the history of technological advance in Colorado. Already it is apparent that the planning occurring with regard to House Bill 99-1102, the "Beanpole Bill," is based on the regional alliances developed through this program.

+

<blockquote>Several of the larger projects had tremendous geographical scope. These led to the formation of alliances that will have a lasting legacy in the history of technological advance in Colorado. Already it is apparent that the planning occurring with regard to House Bill 99-1102, the "Beanpole Bill," is based on the regional alliances developed through this program.</blockquote>

In 1996 Moffat County applied for a regional Telecom Center for the Colorado State Patrol, which would require DS-3 connectivity (up to 45 Mbps) for telecom infrastructure. The proposed center would combine five agencies in a single location.

In 1996 Moffat County applied for a regional Telecom Center for the Colorado State Patrol, which would require DS-3 connectivity (up to 45 Mbps) for telecom infrastructure. The proposed center would combine five agencies in a single location.

In early 1997, roughly contemporaneous to the State of Colorado’s telecommunications infrastructure strategic planning process, YVEDC began a new regional telecommunications planning effort (initially 5 counties) that ultimately knit together the Colorado State Patrol infrastructure development project and the Beanpole Project into the three-county (Moffat, Rio Blanco, and Routt) Northwest Colorado Beanpole Project.

In early 1997, roughly contemporaneous to the State of Colorado’s telecommunications infrastructure strategic planning process, YVEDC began a new regional telecommunications planning effort (initially 5 counties) that ultimately knit together the Colorado State Patrol infrastructure development project and the Beanpole Project into the three-county (Moffat, Rio Blanco, and Routt) Northwest Colorado Beanpole Project.

+

The Mission Statement of the early planning group was:

The Mission Statement of the early planning group was:

−

To facilitate the cooperative development of a sound telecommunications infrastructure in NW Colorado that will remain technologically competitive while promoting regional economic development and addressing the needs of public and non-profit organizations, private enterprise, and individual residents.

+

<blockquote>To facilitate the cooperative development of a sound telecommunications infrastructure in NW Colorado that will remain technologically competitive while promoting regional economic development and addressing the needs of public and non-profit organizations, private enterprise, and individual residents.</blockquote>

Over the next two years, cost and service availability negotiations would take place with US West and a consulting organization (Media Management Services, Inc.) would prepare a Telecommunications Strategy and Plan (1999).

Over the next two years, cost and service availability negotiations would take place with US West and a consulting organization (Media Management Services, Inc.) would prepare a Telecommunications Strategy and Plan (1999).

Line 96:

Line 95:

Moffat county received a $600,000 Energy and Mineral Impact Assistance grant in 1999 to support the DS-3 connectivity requirement the Colorado State Patrol Communications Center. Moffat and Rio Blanco Counties each committed to $1.25 million of support for telecommunications infrastructure development, with much of the sum allocated for prepayment of services from a winning bidder (Moffat funding included the DOLA $600K). In March of 2000 the Beanpole Project grant award to the partnering Northwest counties of Routt, Rio Blanco, and Moffat added $1.375 million to the regional infrastructure development budget.

Moffat county received a $600,000 Energy and Mineral Impact Assistance grant in 1999 to support the DS-3 connectivity requirement the Colorado State Patrol Communications Center. Moffat and Rio Blanco Counties each committed to $1.25 million of support for telecommunications infrastructure development, with much of the sum allocated for prepayment of services from a winning bidder (Moffat funding included the DOLA $600K). In March of 2000 the Beanpole Project grant award to the partnering Northwest counties of Routt, Rio Blanco, and Moffat added $1.375 million to the regional infrastructure development budget.

−

Timeline:

+

==Timeline==

March 1999, Moffat County receives $600,000 DOLA Energy and Mineral Impact Fund grant to help complete the telecommunications redundant loop to the Colorado State Patrol communication center.

March 1999, Moffat County receives $600,000 DOLA Energy and Mineral Impact Fund grant to help complete the telecommunications redundant loop to the Colorado State Patrol communication center.

Line 140:

Line 139:

As of the writing of this paper (July 2006), NC Telecom is expected to emerge from Chapter 11 reorganization and continue as a service provider to the region. Long term impacts of the Bankruptcy filing and the limitations it may place on NC Telecom's future infrastructure development capabilities are unknown.

As of the writing of this paper (July 2006), NC Telecom is expected to emerge from Chapter 11 reorganization and continue as a service provider to the region. Long term impacts of the Bankruptcy filing and the limitations it may place on NC Telecom's future infrastructure development capabilities are unknown.

−

Outcomes

+

==Outcomes==

Measured by the three criteria for evaluation of Beanpole Community success noted above, the Northwest Beanpole Project was successful:

Measured by the three criteria for evaluation of Beanpole Community success noted above, the Northwest Beanpole Project was successful:

−

Was additional infrastructure built as part of the project to extend the reach of high-bandwidth connectivity in the communities?

+

===Was additional infrastructure built as part of the project to extend the reach of high-bandwidth connectivity in the communities? ===

Yes. New fiber optic infrastructure connects Moffat and Rio Blanco county communities with network resources in Grand Junction and redundant connection to Utah. Meeker, in part, and Rangely have extensive municipal fiber infrastructure as a result of the project. Routt County has improved network access in many formerly underserved communities, as well as upgraded capabilities in its Steamboat Springs vendor central office and service locations elsewhere in the county (as do the other counties). In the past year, Rangely has continued infrastructure development by installing conduit for future fiber installation in all road construction for 'water trunk lines.'

Yes. New fiber optic infrastructure connects Moffat and Rio Blanco county communities with network resources in Grand Junction and redundant connection to Utah. Meeker, in part, and Rangely have extensive municipal fiber infrastructure as a result of the project. Routt County has improved network access in many formerly underserved communities, as well as upgraded capabilities in its Steamboat Springs vendor central office and service locations elsewhere in the county (as do the other counties). In the past year, Rangely has continued infrastructure development by installing conduit for future fiber installation in all road construction for 'water trunk lines.'

−

Has there been a measurable and lasting impact of this access on the communities?

+

===Has there been a measurable and lasting impact of this access on the communities? ===

Yes. The project has provided improved access to bandwidth as well as an awareness of its benefits and the benefits of aggregate development. In addition, both national and local research have shown positive economic development outcomes for communities with broadband access. Also, there is the evidence of the increased utility of network connectivity for many users. For example, a request for success stories of the Northwest Beanpole project generated this e-mailed comment about the Meeker municipal area network (MAN):

Yes. The project has provided improved access to bandwidth as well as an awareness of its benefits and the benefits of aggregate development. In addition, both national and local research have shown positive economic development outcomes for communities with broadband access. Also, there is the evidence of the increased utility of network connectivity for many users. For example, a request for success stories of the Northwest Beanpole project generated this e-mailed comment about the Meeker municipal area network (MAN):

−

The Beanpole spawned an interesting development in Meeker. It helped us to form the MAN cooperative that we continue to use. The MAN (Metropolitan Area Network) includes the school district, county, town, road and bridge, CSU extension agency, hospital, and public library. We are all on the same fiber MAN with the front end located in our court house. The Beanpole helped reduce the cost of connecting the MAN to the MNT so that all of our agencies could redirect technology funds into paying for the connections to the fiber MAN (originally owned by the school district).

+

<blockquote>The Beanpole spawned an interesting development in Meeker. It helped us to form the MAN cooperative that we continue to use. The MAN (Metropolitan Area Network) includes the school district, county, town, road and bridge, CSU extension agency, hospital, and public library. We are all on the same fiber MAN with the front end located in our court house. The Beanpole helped reduce the cost of connecting the MAN to the MNT so that all of our agencies could redirect technology funds into paying for the connections to the fiber MAN (originally owned by the school district).

−

Now, as a MAN, all 7 techs meet monthly to share information, technology, best practices, and more. This personal networking has been invaluable. We also share technology costs such as purchasing antivirus in bulk as a cooperative. The county and school districts have split the costs of an e-mail server to the benefit of both entities. The school district received a grant to implement an Avvid phone system and, by placing it at the head of the MAN, other agencies were then given the opportunity of using this system which can handle about 4000 phones. The county has now implemented Avvid Phones throughout their organization. The county also purchased a device that filters out spam, viruses, and can block certain web sites. By placing this at the front of our equipment, all entities benefit from this single purchase. The stories of cooperative benefit go on. Currently the county is heading up a project to place a wireless redundant network over the top of our fiber.

+

Now, as a MAN, all 7 techs meet monthly to share information, technology, best practices, and more. This personal networking has been invaluable. We also share technology costs such as purchasing antivirus in bulk as a cooperative. The county and school districts have split the costs of an e-mail server to the benefit of both entities. The school district received a grant to implement an Avvid phone system and, by placing it at the head of the MAN, other agencies were then given the opportunity of using this system which can handle about 4000 phones. The county has now implemented Avvid Phones throughout their organization. The county also purchased a device that filters out spam, viruses, and can block certain web sites. By placing this at the front of our equipment, all entities benefit from this single purchase. The stories of cooperative benefit go on. Currently the county is heading up a project to place a wireless redundant network over the top of our fiber.</blockquote>

It should be noted that the Meeker fiber optic municipal area network is largely the product of earlier work by the White River Electric Association, the local electrical cooperative and start-up partner with UBTA in creating NC Telecom.

It should be noted that the Meeker fiber optic municipal area network is largely the product of earlier work by the White River Electric Association, the local electrical cooperative and start-up partner with UBTA in creating NC Telecom.

−

Has this change been sustainable?

+

===Has this change been sustainable?===

Yes. The improved telecommunications infrastructure, competitive services, and increased community experience with broadband will not go away. The majority of Beanpole entities have indicated a desire to continue service with NC Telecom, but they also have access to an array of many other competitive service options that were not available before the Beanpole Project.

Yes. The improved telecommunications infrastructure, competitive services, and increased community experience with broadband will not go away. The majority of Beanpole entities have indicated a desire to continue service with NC Telecom, but they also have access to an array of many other competitive service options that were not available before the Beanpole Project.

+

===Notable Outcomes ===

+

*The Northwest Beanpole Project was the only BP project to leverage a public safety investment (by Moffat County Government) to locate the Colorado State Patrol Regional Telecommunications center in Craig.

§ The Northwest Beanpole Project was the only BP project to leverage a public safety investment (by Moffat County Government) to locate the Colorado State Patrol Regional Telecommunications center in Craig.

+

*It established for the State and the northwest region a redundant path to internet infrastructure in Utah in addition to the fiber infrastructure available along the I-70 corridor, an asset to the State and a protection of service continuity for the region.

−

§ It provided three years of subsidy funding ($760K) supporting 96 sites for 35 qualified entities (county, cities and town governments, libraries, schools, colleges, fire districts, hospitals, nonprofit public health agencies, and special government districts) in Routt, Moffat, and Rio Blanco counties.

+

*It provided the population of Rio Blanco County one of the most complete rural fiber optic infrastructure implementations in the State, with long-term advantages for government, education, and health care services.

−

§ It provided more than $500K in equipment upgrades (primarily routers and modems) for participating sites.

+

*It was partially responsible for an acceleration of DSL implementation in the region by increasing market competition and bandwidth availability.

−

§ The newly built fiber infrastructure significantly extended fiber optic capability and access in the region.

+

*It provided significant cost reductions (greater than 50%) and improved access to high bandwidth connectivity to public users in the region.

−

§ It established for the State and the northwest region a redundant path to internet infrastructure in Utah in addition to the fiber infrastructure available along the I-70 corridor, an asset to the State and a protection of service continuity for the region.

+

*It significantly reduced the barrier of added "backhaul" charges and other distance sensitive costs and technical limitations for network connectivity.

−

§ It provided the population of Rio Blanco County one of the most complete rural fiber optic infrastructure implementations in the State, with long-term advantages for government, education, and health care services.

+

*It sustained, through the efforts of the Yampa Valley Economic Development Council (YVEDC) and Yampa Valley Partners, a decade-long aggregation of stakeholder activity and attention toward development issues and consideration of economic impacts of telecommunications resource access.

−

§ It was partially responsible for an acceleration of DSL implementation in the region by increasing market competition and bandwidth availability.

+

*It proved a market for state-of-the-art telephony and network resource access in the region, against long-held vendor claims to the contrary.

−

§ It provided significant cost reductions (greater than 50%) and improved access to high bandwidth connectivity to public users in the region.

+

*It has excellent continuity of participation. Early indications show a very high percentage (87%) of end-users continuing service beyond the subsidy period.

−

§ It significantly reduced the barrier of added "backhaul" charges and other distance sensitive costs and technical limitations for network connectivity.

−

§ It sustained, through the efforts of the Yampa Valley Economic Development Council (YVEDC) and Yampa Valley Partners, a decade-long aggregation of stakeholder activity and attention toward development issues and consideration of economic impacts of telecommunications resource access.

+

==Infrastructure and Bandwidth Access==

−

+

−

§ It proved a market for state-of-the-art telephony and network resource access in the region, against long-held vendor claims to the contrary.

+

−

+

−

§ It has excellent continuity of participation. Early indications show a very high percentage (87%) of end-users continuing service beyond the subsidy period.

+

−

+

−

+

−

+

−

+

−

Infrastructure and Bandwidth Access

+

The most significant outcome of the Northwest Beanpole Project was its success in dramatically increasing access to broadband connectivity in the region. The average cost of T-1 connectivity in the region dropped to less than half of what it had been previously, and so-called “backhaul costs” were almost entirely eliminated.

The most significant outcome of the Northwest Beanpole Project was its success in dramatically increasing access to broadband connectivity in the region. The average cost of T-1 connectivity in the region dropped to less than half of what it had been previously, and so-called “backhaul costs” were almost entirely eliminated.

The project resulted in significant build-out of fiber optic connectivity in the region, extending far beyond what had previously been available. Rio Blanco County is now has one of the most extensive rural fiber optic implementations in Colorado. NC Telecom’s fiber infrastructure:

The project resulted in significant build-out of fiber optic connectivity in the region, extending far beyond what had previously been available. Rio Blanco County is now has one of the most extensive rural fiber optic implementations in Colorado. NC Telecom’s fiber infrastructure:

−

−

Not all positive outcomes regarding increased bandwidth access in the region can be attributed to the Beanpole Project investment. Aggressive and well-run competitive ISPs, such as SpringSips have played a strong role in extending the awareness and use of DSL and wireless connectivity in the region. They, too, have benefited from increased availability and lower cost of bandwidth locally that resulted from MNT/Beanpole development in the region.

Not all positive outcomes regarding increased bandwidth access in the region can be attributed to the Beanpole Project investment. Aggressive and well-run competitive ISPs, such as SpringSips have played a strong role in extending the awareness and use of DSL and wireless connectivity in the region. They, too, have benefited from increased availability and lower cost of bandwidth locally that resulted from MNT/Beanpole development in the region.

Line 208:

Line 199:

−

Economic Development

+

==Economic Development==

Both national and local research support positive economic development outcomes for the Northwest Colorado Beanpole Project. However, the Project cannot alone lay claim to a causal relationship between its efforts and any economic gains in the region. In the half-dozen years since the project implementation began, the bursting of the “dot-com bubble,” 9/11, the ongoing State fiscal crisis, and the impacts of the Iraq war on Federal programs and funding are all externalities which have affected local and regional economies in the State. Also, the Beanpole Project was not the only telecommunications infrastructure development activity in the region. Even so, there are observations of positive outcomes for the regional economy.

Both national and local research support positive economic development outcomes for the Northwest Colorado Beanpole Project. However, the Project cannot alone lay claim to a causal relationship between its efforts and any economic gains in the region. In the half-dozen years since the project implementation began, the bursting of the “dot-com bubble,” 9/11, the ongoing State fiscal crisis, and the impacts of the Iraq war on Federal programs and funding are all externalities which have affected local and regional economies in the State. Also, the Beanpole Project was not the only telecommunications infrastructure development activity in the region. Even so, there are observations of positive outcomes for the regional economy.

Line 218:

Line 209:

Specifically, the study found that communities with broadband access, when compared to communities without broadband access, in the period 1998-2002, experienced more rapid growth in employment, number of businesses overall and businesses in IT intensive sectors. Broadband communities also showed higher property values.

Specifically, the study found that communities with broadband access, when compared to communities without broadband access, in the period 1998-2002, experienced more rapid growth in employment, number of businesses overall and businesses in IT intensive sectors. Broadband communities also showed higher property values.

|Business Establishments (proxy for number of firms)||Broadband added about 0.05-1.2% to growth rate, 1998-2002

+

|-

+

|Housing Rents(proxy for property values|More than 6% higher in 2000 in zip codes where broadband was available by 1999

The study noted:

The study noted:

Line 229:

Line 225:

The most important outcome of this study, however, may be it demonstration that public econometric data can be used to measure and track this rural economic development issue in future years.

The most important outcome of this study, however, may be it demonstration that public econometric data can be used to measure and track this rural economic development issue in future years.

−

A Local Study

+

==A Local Study==

Closer to home, the effects of such incremental increases in growth may also be seen in the shift toward what is called “Location Neutral Businesses” (LNBs) and “Location Neutral Employees” (LNE) in the Yampa Valley recently reported by the Routt County Economic Development Cooperative (March, 2006; RCEDC), noting a shift toward LNBs in the region. Location Neutral Businesses, i.e, businesses whose clients may be anywhere in the world, are made possible by broadband network access. These businesses do not necessarily have traditional physical business places such as storefronts or office buildings, and as such, are more difficult to track and measure by traditional econometric means.

Closer to home, the effects of such incremental increases in growth may also be seen in the shift toward what is called “Location Neutral Businesses” (LNBs) and “Location Neutral Employees” (LNE) in the Yampa Valley recently reported by the Routt County Economic Development Cooperative (March, 2006; RCEDC), noting a shift toward LNBs in the region. Location Neutral Businesses, i.e, businesses whose clients may be anywhere in the world, are made possible by broadband network access. These businesses do not necessarily have traditional physical business places such as storefronts or office buildings, and as such, are more difficult to track and measure by traditional econometric means.

Line 238:

Line 234:

−

In the Broader Context

+

==In the Broader Context==

Although the Northwest Beanpole project experienced the bankruptcy filing of its provider late in its implementation, the benefits of its subsidy and infrastructure investment remain largely accomplished.

Although the Northwest Beanpole project experienced the bankruptcy filing of its provider late in its implementation, the benefits of its subsidy and infrastructure investment remain largely accomplished.

Line 247:

Line 243:

Even though several of the communities encountered difficulties in their Beanpole implementations, spokespersons for all Beanpole implementation communities (without exception) reported positive outcomes for their project, one saying that the project was "one of the better things that the state has ever done."

Even though several of the communities encountered difficulties in their Beanpole implementations, spokespersons for all Beanpole implementation communities (without exception) reported positive outcomes for their project, one saying that the project was "one of the better things that the state has ever done."

−

Montezuma and La Plata - The Montezuma and La Plata County Beanpole Project benefited from the development of a 420 mile fiber optic network between Albuquerque, New Mexico and Grand Junction, Colorado by a broad partnership of rural electric associations. This project, called Pathnet orREAnet declared chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2001. It emerged from bankruptcy as FastTrack Communications, a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) that operates from within Qwest central offices in a number of southwestern Colorado communities. FastTrack is a subsidiary of the Durango-based La Plata Electric Association (LPEA; providing electrical power to La Plata, Archuleta, Mineral, and Hinsdale counties) and the Cortez-based Empire Electric Association, serving Montezuma county. Beanpole funding was used to contract for a 20 year IRU (Indefeasable Right of Use) to the fiber infrastructure, purchase of equipment, and subsidized connectivity for the project participants. Leveraged with Beanpole funding, city and county government offices and other participants have fiber optic connectivity that supports the use of state-of-the-art videoconferencing and VOIP applications.

+

===Montezuma and La Plata===

+

The Montezuma and La Plata County Beanpole Project benefited from the development of a 420 mile fiber optic network between Albuquerque, New Mexico and Grand Junction, Colorado by a broad partnership of rural electric associations. This project, called Pathnet orREAnet declared chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2001. It emerged from bankruptcy as FastTrack Communications, a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) that operates from within Qwest central offices in a number of southwestern Colorado communities. FastTrack is a subsidiary of the Durango-based La Plata Electric Association (LPEA; providing electrical power to La Plata, Archuleta, Mineral, and Hinsdale counties) and the Cortez-based Empire Electric Association, serving Montezuma county. Beanpole funding was used to contract for a 20 year IRU (Indefeasable Right of Use) to the fiber infrastructure, purchase of equipment, and subsidized connectivity for the project participants. Leveraged with Beanpole funding, city and county government offices and other participants have fiber optic connectivity that supports the use of state-of-the-art videoconferencing and VOIP applications.

The infrastructure has been fertile ground for service development. LPEA, and electrical cooperative, has used 'unclaimed capital credits' to support the Montoya Education Network, an interactive video distance learning service that links five school districts in the region. In addition to its support of sharing courses such as foreign language for high school students, the network is the most active in middle and elementary school uses of distance learning in the state.

The infrastructure has been fertile ground for service development. LPEA, and electrical cooperative, has used 'unclaimed capital credits' to support the Montoya Education Network, an interactive video distance learning service that links five school districts in the region. In addition to its support of sharing courses such as foreign language for high school students, the network is the most active in middle and elementary school uses of distance learning in the state.

Line 253:

Line 250:

In Montezuma County, the City of Cortez operates the Cortez Community Network (CCN) a fiber-optic municipal area network that has OC-3 (155 Mbps) connectivity, one DS-3 of which is allocated to supporting its Beanpole project participating sites, with a subsidy that is expected to last into 2007. The Beanpole project also is providing continuing support for connectivity in some outlying communities near Cortez. The City of Cortez Community Network may be the most robust rural example of municipal fiber optic development and connectivity in the state.

In Montezuma County, the City of Cortez operates the Cortez Community Network (CCN) a fiber-optic municipal area network that has OC-3 (155 Mbps) connectivity, one DS-3 of which is allocated to supporting its Beanpole project participating sites, with a subsidy that is expected to last into 2007. The Beanpole project also is providing continuing support for connectivity in some outlying communities near Cortez. The City of Cortez Community Network may be the most robust rural example of municipal fiber optic development and connectivity in the state.

−

Otero, Prowers, Bent, Crowley and Kiowa - This Beanpole community, was able to extend its fiber optic network, originally built with $3.3 million of Connect Colorado grant funding in 1998, to government offices and subsidize use with the additional Beanpole funding. The expanded network is in place and operational, with the educational portion now known as the Arkansas Valley Network Association (AVNA) a 501 3c non-profit organization. The original network was built by SECOM, the telecommunications subsidiary of the Southeast Colorado Power Association (SECPA), the regional electrical cooperative, consisting primarily of 630 miles of aerial fiber optic cable mounted on the cooperative's electrical transmission towers and poles. The 36 strands of fiber optic cable, 12 were reserved for the use of Otero Junior College, schools, and local non-profit agencies, with SECPA keeping 24 strands for commercial use. With the addition of Beanpole funding to connect government agencies, county governments, and other users, some of the remaining 24 strands were used for Beanpole project/MNT connectivity. Today Otero Junior College and Southeast BOCES are providing a full schedule of courses on the AVNA distance learning network to school districts in nine counties.

+

===Otero, Prowers, Bent, Crowley and Kiowa===

+

+

This Beanpole community, was able to extend its fiber optic network, originally built with $3.3 million of Connect Colorado grant funding in 1998, to government offices and subsidize use with the additional Beanpole funding. The expanded network is in place and operational, with the educational portion now known as the Arkansas Valley Network Association (AVNA) a 501 3c non-profit organization. The original network was built by SECOM, the telecommunications subsidiary of the Southeast Colorado Power Association (SECPA), the regional electrical cooperative, consisting primarily of 630 miles of aerial fiber optic cable mounted on the cooperative's electrical transmission towers and poles. The 36 strands of fiber optic cable, 12 were reserved for the use of Otero Junior College, schools, and local non-profit agencies, with SECPA keeping 24 strands for commercial use. With the addition of Beanpole funding to connect government agencies, county governments, and other users, some of the remaining 24 strands were used for Beanpole project/MNT connectivity. Today Otero Junior College and Southeast BOCES are providing a full schedule of courses on the AVNA distance learning network to school districts in nine counties.

−

Kit Carson and Cheyenne - The Kit Carson and Cheyenne County Beanpole Project implementation (once referred to as TRECC) provided subsidized MNT connectivity to its participants, some of whom remain connected via the MNT today.

+

===Kit Carson and Cheyenne===

+

The Kit Carson and Cheyenne County Beanpole Project implementation (once referred to as TRECC) provided subsidized MNT connectivity to its participants, some of whom remain connected via the MNT today.

−

Morgan - The Morgan County Beanpole project encountered difficulty with its RFP process and eventually managed to complete a fiber network within Fort Morgan, providing shared connectivity (at 6 Mbps) for county and local government users and the school district. Although early plans to extend the network to outlying communities such as Brush have not happened, the existing network is functioning well.

+

===Morgan===

+

The Morgan County Beanpole project encountered difficulty with its RFP process and eventually managed to complete a fiber network within Fort Morgan, providing shared connectivity (at 6 Mbps) for county and local government users and the school district. Although early plans to extend the network to outlying communities such as Brush have not happened, the existing network is functioning well.

−

Sedgwick - The Sedgwick County Beapole Project was a wireless implementation that was provided by a company called EduQuest, which also benefited from another DOLA grant to rehabilitate a former retail property in Julesburg as a community computing center. The effort was ultimately unsustainable, probably due to the inability to support the level of staffing initially attempted. A spokesman for the Sedgwick County project reported the positive outcome of stimulated interest in competition among telecommunications providers in the county.

+

===Sedgwick===

+

The Sedgwick County Beapole Project was a wireless implementation that was provided by a company called EduQuest, which also benefited from another DOLA grant to rehabilitate a former retail property in Julesburg as a community computing center. The effort was ultimately unsustainable, probably due to the inability to support the level of staffing initially attempted. A spokesman for the Sedgwick County project reported the positive outcome of stimulated interest in competition among telecommunications providers in the county.

−

Summit - The Summit County Beanpole Project was also a wireless implementation initially contracted to a company called NetBeam. When NetBeam and then its sister company Peak Speed filed for bankruptcy, the county appointed a trustee for the Community Wireless effort, but service problems in the fall of 2005 resulted in the county stepping in to retrieve the assets and seek a new operator. The county expects a new operator to be in place and services to be available in the coming year.

+

===Summit===

+

The Summit County Beanpole Project was also a wireless implementation initially contracted to a company called NetBeam. When NetBeam and then its sister company Peak Speed filed for bankruptcy, the county appointed a trustee for the Community Wireless effort, but service problems in the fall of 2005 resulted in the county stepping in to retrieve the assets and seek a new operator. The county expects a new operator to be in place and services to be available in the coming year.

Overall, an assessment of the seven Beanpole implementation communities would report that four developed continuing and sustainable infrastructure that extended the impact of the MNT in their areas; one provided access to improved, more affordable bandwidth access (Kit Carson and Cheyenne Counties); and two provided improved bandwidth access during their implementation periods but for business reasons did not result in a sustainable resource for their communities.

Overall, an assessment of the seven Beanpole implementation communities would report that four developed continuing and sustainable infrastructure that extended the impact of the MNT in their areas; one provided access to improved, more affordable bandwidth access (Kit Carson and Cheyenne Counties); and two provided improved bandwidth access during their implementation periods but for business reasons did not result in a sustainable resource for their communities.

Line 268:

Line 271:

The "Beanpole -- Addressing Last Mile Access" chapter of the MNT Final Report noted several lessons learned, including (ellipses supplied):

The "Beanpole -- Addressing Last Mile Access" chapter of the MNT Final Report noted several lessons learned, including (ellipses supplied):

−

§ The statutory requirement for connectivity to the state-operated MNT has both positive and negative aspects…Its ability to process and, on a long-term basis, provide appropriate customer service to an expanded customer base is, as yet, unproven. The limitations on expanding staff resources for the state-operated system while expanding the customer base significantly will be challenging.

+

*The statutory requirement for connectivity to the state-operated MNT has both positive and negative aspects…Its ability to process and, on a long-term basis, provide appropriate customer service to an expanded customer base is, as yet, unproven. The limitations on expanding staff resources for the state-operated system while expanding the customer base significantly will be challenging.

−

§ …setting up collaboratively but separately administered project in DPA and DoLA proved to be a detriment to efficiency and timeliness.

+

*setting up collaboratively but separately administered project in DPA and DoLA proved to be a detriment to efficiency and timeliness.

−

§ There was inadequate recognition of the demands that extending MNT service to a new large customer base would entail. Successes did not emerge until state agency connectivity was largely achieved and available resources could be redirected to focus on non-state customers, including Beanpole communities.

+

*There was inadequate recognition of the demands that extending MNT service to a new large customer base would entail. Successes did not emerge until state agency connectivity was largely achieved and available resources could be redirected to focus on non-state customers, including Beanpole communities.

−

§ The Beanpole process worked the best in communities where a large local/regional technology competent public office was located. This could involve a larger general-purpose government with an information technology program, a community college with a sophisticated information technology director or some other key actor. The on-site and on-going presence of local technically skilled IT professionals was a significant factor in achieving progress.

+

*The Beanpole process worked the best in communities where a large local/regional technology competent public office was located. This could involve a larger general-purpose government with an information technology program, a community college with a sophisticated information technology director or some other key actor. The on-site and on-going presence of local technically skilled IT professionals was a significant factor in achieving progress.

A 2002 State audit of the Beanpole Project, sparked by concerns about the slow pace of implementation and concern for community benefit, recorded the mistaken judgement of assuming the program could be started and run in parallel with the MNT implementation. Actually, the Beanpole Project was started significantly in advance of the MNT implementation. The audit also noted the administrative error of failing to staff technical support and failing to establish an administrative coordination between the two programs.

A 2002 State audit of the Beanpole Project, sparked by concerns about the slow pace of implementation and concern for community benefit, recorded the mistaken judgement of assuming the program could be started and run in parallel with the MNT implementation. Actually, the Beanpole Project was started significantly in advance of the MNT implementation. The audit also noted the administrative error of failing to staff technical support and failing to establish an administrative coordination between the two programs.

Line 283:

Line 286:

The May 2002 State audit concluded:

The May 2002 State audit concluded:

−

Coordination and communication problems between the beanpole project and the MNT have existed since the beginning of the Beanpole Project. These problems have impacted the overall success of the Beanpole Project by delaying the ability of local communities to connect to the MNT. The Beanpole Project began awarding grants to communities a full year prior to the development of the MNT. As a result, several Beanpole grant recipients were ready to enter the implementation phase long before the MNT capability existed in their area. In addition, only in the last six months has the Division of Information Technologies MNT Program Office assigned staff to aid local communities in solving the technical problems that prevented their connection to the MNT. Our work indicates that having state employees dedicated to assisting local communities has helped some beanpole recipients move toward the final goal of connecting to the MNT. [p.3, Beanpole Telecommunications Project Performance Audit, May 2002; Office of the State Auditor, State of Colorado)

+

<blockquote>Coordination and communication problems between the beanpole project and the MNT have existed since the beginning of the Beanpole Project. These problems have impacted the overall success of the Beanpole Project by delaying the ability of local communities to connect to the MNT. The Beanpole Project began awarding grants to communities a full year prior to the development of the MNT. As a result, several Beanpole grant recipients were ready to enter the implementation phase long before the MNT capability existed in their area. In addition, only in the last six months has the Division of Information Technologies MNT Program Office assigned staff to aid local communities in solving the technical problems that prevented their connection to the MNT. Our work indicates that having state employees dedicated to assisting local communities has helped some beanpole recipients move toward the final goal of connecting to the MNT. [p.3, Beanpole Telecommunications Project Performance Audit, May 2002; Office of the State Auditor, State of Colorado)</blockquote>

The audit report is probably the best history and summary of the problems in execution and coordination experienced by the DOLA, PDP/DOIT, and the communities in the program implementation. Future efforts will benefit from attention to its observations and conclusions.

The audit report is probably the best history and summary of the problems in execution and coordination experienced by the DOLA, PDP/DOIT, and the communities in the program implementation. Future efforts will benefit from attention to its observations and conclusions.

−

Summary

+

==Summary==

The direct dollar benefit of the Northwest Beanpole project funding was more than $700,000 in subsidized access to greater bandwidth by the project's 96 end users and more than $500,000 in connectivity equipment upgrades. Together with connectivity funding from Moffat and Rio Blanco Counties, the project leveraged infrastructure investment for the region measured in the tens of millions. The project was one of the more successful Beanpole Project implementations, distinguished by its collaborative planning and administration.

The direct dollar benefit of the Northwest Beanpole project funding was more than $700,000 in subsidized access to greater bandwidth by the project's 96 end users and more than $500,000 in connectivity equipment upgrades. Together with connectivity funding from Moffat and Rio Blanco Counties, the project leveraged infrastructure investment for the region measured in the tens of millions. The project was one of the more successful Beanpole Project implementations, distinguished by its collaborative planning and administration.

Line 304:

Line 307:

This assessment of the Beanpole Project outcome for Northwest Colorado must acknowledge that DOLA and the MNT, however flawed their implementation of the program may have been, did provide significant advantages and opportunities to the participating communities. The State of Colorado should note the many positive outcomes of the Beanpole development effort in any future programs planning for rural development assistance. Communities that have not yet received telecommunications development assistance should find encouragement in this history and the following "Success Factors."

This assessment of the Beanpole Project outcome for Northwest Colorado must acknowledge that DOLA and the MNT, however flawed their implementation of the program may have been, did provide significant advantages and opportunities to the participating communities. The State of Colorado should note the many positive outcomes of the Beanpole development effort in any future programs planning for rural development assistance. Communities that have not yet received telecommunications development assistance should find encouragement in this history and the following "Success Factors."

−

+

==Success Factors==

−

+

−

+

−

+

−

+

−

+

−

Success Factors

+

"Chance favors the prepared mind." Telecommunications infrastructure development favors the prepared community. Is a community regularly addressing telecommunications infrastructure in a public setting via a task force, committee, or meeting of elected officials?

"Chance favors the prepared mind." Telecommunications infrastructure development favors the prepared community. Is a community regularly addressing telecommunications infrastructure in a public setting via a task force, committee, or meeting of elected officials?

Introduction

The Northwest Beanpole project was one of 4 multi-county telecommunications infrastructure projects funded under HB 99-1102, a 1999 Colorado legislative act commonly referred to as the "Beanpole Bill."

The $4.7 million Beanpole Project was a parallel effort to the implementation of the State's Multi-Use Network, the MNT. By design, the project was an effort to leverage the State's "anchor tenant" investment by aggregating and connecting public users (schools, local government, and hospitals) to extend the benefits of Colorado's statewide network infrastructure. Actual funding, with additional amounts from Energy and Mineral Impact funds, was noted to have been $5.3 million by a 2002 State audit. The funding was considered the first of two phases, with a $5 million second phase expected to follow in 2002 (and an estimate of $25 million in need, statewide). There were also three single county implementation grants and (over a period of years) eighteen assessment and planning grant recipients (representing 36 counties). Seven communities representing sixteen counties received implementation grants totaling about $4.6 million.

The Implementation Grant recipients and their award amounts were:

Routt Rio Blanco, and Moffat -- $1,375,000

Kit Carson and Cheyenne -- $167,200

Montezuma and La Plata -- $1,375,000

Morgan -- $258,000Sedgwick -- $204,000

Otero, Prowers, Bent, Crowley and Kiowa -- $750,000

Summit -- $472,688

Five of the seven implementations were successful. The Sedgwick and Summit County implementations were able to provide wireless services in the implementation period but were eventually unsustainable in their original form due to vendor business failures.

It is difficult to evaluate and compare outcomes of the Beanpole implementation communities in part because each implementation community dealt independently with the characteristic resources and setbacks of its own environment. Three criteria for evaluation of outcomes are

Was additional infrastructure built as part of the project to extend the reach of high-bandwidth connectivity in the communities?

Has there been a measurable and lasting impact of this access on the communities?

Has this change been sustainable?

For Northwest Colorado, as with many of the other implementation communities, the answers to all three criteria have been "yes."

There were many external events and changes that affected the Beanpole Implementation. The MNT network contract was executed with US West the day before they were acquired by Qwest. There was also a change of administration in State Government between Democratic Governor Roy Romer and Republican Governor Bill Owens, resulting in changes in all appointive state agency positions.

The national and state economic downturn early in the MNT implementation also led to changes in many departmental management and technical professional positions through hiring freezes, downgrading of positions, attrition and incented retirement. Thus, over the course of the Beanpole/MNT implementation, many that were aware of the initial concept and goals of the MNT were replaced by others who had access only to operational information about the project.

The bursting of the "Internet Bubble" and economic shocks which followed 9/11 caused both a significant decline in Qwest's stock price and a fiscal crisis for Colorado State Government. Although funding was in place for the MNT, there was less financial margin for contingencies available to either the State or Qwest in the network implementation. There were also many gradual implementation changes and adjustments based on practical findings, budget limitations, policy decisions, and affects of participation decisions by local and county government entities and other potential public users.

Northwest Beanpole Project implementation plans between Meeker and Grand Junction were also adversely affected by the bankruptcy of Adesta, a firm that was contracted via what was called the "Shared Resources Initiative" to allocate fiber for the Colorado Department of Transportation's Intelligent Transportation System project. Adesta was a partner with NC Telecom (the NW Beanpole Project vendor) in the construction of fiber from Meeker to Rifle.

As a pioneering a statewide "public/private partnership" networking model, the combined efforts of Beanpole Project and the MNT amounted to a great deal of learning by doing and a lot of practical experience in the value of stakeholder aggregation and program coordination. It must be noted that, even with all of the financial and management dislocations, the MNT and the Beanpole Project were successful in improving statewide bandwidth access and significantly reducing its cost in the period 1999-2006. This benefit continues, although the MNT has ceased to be an influence on pricing and availability of services in most of the State.

Today, the Beanpole Project is largely done. The MNT 2005 Annual Report noted that the total of non-state agency direct customers of the MNT was 67 in 2005 vs. 105 for 2004 (a 36% decline). Direct customer base fell by 57% over the period. The report cited service pricing and MNT network security requirements as reasons for the decline.

As of September 2005, for example, only 19 of Colorado's 178 school districts were connected to the MNT and four of those were planning to switch to another provider in the fall of 2007. The MNT, however, is engaged in planning its future. The MNT 2005 Annual Report included a seven-item list of future plans:

Continue to make MNT access available to non-state agencies;

Convene [a] state-wide planning group to plan for the transition of the MNT. Migration from today's megabit per second networks to gigabit per second will be key;

Work with the Department of Local Affairs to be sure that all local governments have access at adequate bandwidth to meet minimum state standards;

Aggressively support direct-connection to MNT from public sector fiber optic MANs (Municipal Area Networks);

Engineer the Core of the MNT to support the constant bit rate requirements of video and voice;

Expand the use of the MNT for voice applications

The MNT and Qwest's CHSDN, its commercial parallel service, and MNT partner CenturyTel have had a significant impact on broadband access in Colorado. As of the MNT 2005 Annual Report, 85% of all county seats have one or more DSL providers associated with their ANAPs. Ten county seats, however, do not yet have DSL deployments paralleling the MNT's ATM services locally. These are: (for Qwest) Clear Creek, Elbert, Gilpin, Grand, Lake, Park, San Juan, Sedgwick, and teller counties; and (for CenturyTel) Baca and Bent counties.

Northwest Beanpole Project History

The history of the regional planning for telecommunications development that led to and made possible the Northwest Colorado Beanpole Project is notable for its longevity and the breadth and steadfastness of its participation.

The history of broadband infrastructure development efforts in the Northwest dates to 1992, when the Yampa Valley Economic Development Council (YVEDC) formed the Yampa Valley Telecommunication Coalition, with a 5 year plan.

In 1993, an online bulletin board and e-mail service was started and a grant funded an experiment in videoconferencing.

In 1994 the Yampa Valley Telecommunications Coalition (YVTC) provided support to the Colorado Advanced Technology Institute’s (CATI) Colorado Rural Technology Project (CRTP). The CRTP program, under the direction of Dr. Jeff Richardson, was the direct precursor of what eventually came to be called the "Beanpole Project." Dr. Richardson was the author of the "Beanpole" metaphor to describe the utility of a common shared infrastructure upon which community use of network services could grow and flourish.

The CRTP was funded at approximately $330,000 per year by Colorado’s state legislature as a way to spur rural development. The CRTP, through local and statewide grants and technical assistance, facilitated rural development through the use and expansion of Colorado’s rural telecommunications infrastructure from 1991 to 1999, investing in projects in over 35 projects in 27 rural communities. Dr. Jeff Richardson, the Director of the CRTP project at CATI, was contracted as a part-time consultant to DOLA for the Beanpole Project implementation, as was Dr. Flo Raitano, Executive Director of the Colorado Rural Development Council (CRDC). Dr.Raitano had several years of experience providing information programs on economic development impacts of rural telecommunications development.

The YVTC worked closely with the CRTP from the program's inception. The YVTC pioneered the use of Web-based communication in hosting the CRTP website its evolution into the AERIE rural telecommunications resource website (now an archival site, hosted at http://bcn.boulder.co.us/aerie)

The 1990's was the boom decade of Internet development and many state initiatives and grant programs worked collaboratively, in parallel, or converged in its growth and extension. In 1991-92 SuperNet, a higher-education cooperative for network service development, made Internet connectivity available, first for business and research organizations and then for consumers, becoming one of the first Internet Service Providers in the country. In 1998 SuperNet would be sold to US West and the State's portion of the sale, approximately $3 million, would partially fund the Beanpole Project.

In 1994, the Colorado State Library received $2.9 million dollars in federal grants to build a statewide library network, the Access Colorado Library Network (ACLIN). ACLIN became the "anchor tenant" for the expansion of SuperNet points-of-presence (POPS) beyond the front range and into the western slope and other areas of rural Colorado.

In 1995 a $4.3 million rural service settlement by US West was distributed as rural telecommunications project grants.

In 1996, a higher-education/K-12 network planning group called "Connect Colorado" helped pass $20 million of State funding for a program which was called the "Technology Learning Grant and Revolving Loan Program." The largest grant in this 1996-1999 program funded a fiber optic network in the Arkansas Valley, which eventually also received support to expand beyond its educational services as one of the Beanpole implementations. The second largest grant, $2.7 million, funded an educational network project on the Western Slope called WESTCEL. WESTCEL was a cooperative digital network connecting thirty-three communities from Walden to Rangely to Ouray for data and video transmission. Both of these programs were groundbreaking and well-regarded developments for educational networking for the State of Colorado.

Between 1994 and 2004, there were also $4 million in Technology Opportunities Program (TOPS) grants in Colorado, including a CATI grant project titled "GIS and the NII: A Tool for Rural Growth Management," in which YVEDC was a partner.

Part of the legacy of all these technology development projects was a history of partnerships and wide-area collaborations as well as experimentation, knowledge, and increased awareness which was to provide the basis for the successes of the Beanpole Project implementation in later years.

The value of collaboration/aggregation of users and previous experience in a development project was recognized early. The 2000 report on the Technology Learning Grant and Revolving Loan Program (January 31, 2000) noted:

Several of the larger projects had tremendous geographical scope. These led to the formation of alliances that will have a lasting legacy in the history of technological advance in Colorado. Already it is apparent that the planning occurring with regard to House Bill 99-1102, the "Beanpole Bill," is based on the regional alliances developed through this program.

In 1996 Moffat County applied for a regional Telecom Center for the Colorado State Patrol, which would require DS-3 connectivity (up to 45 Mbps) for telecom infrastructure. The proposed center would combine five agencies in a single location.

In early 1997, roughly contemporaneous to the State of Colorado’s telecommunications infrastructure strategic planning process, YVEDC began a new regional telecommunications planning effort (initially 5 counties) that ultimately knit together the Colorado State Patrol infrastructure development project and the Beanpole Project into the three-county (Moffat, Rio Blanco, and Routt) Northwest Colorado Beanpole Project.

The Mission Statement of the early planning group was:

To facilitate the cooperative development of a sound telecommunications infrastructure in NW Colorado that will remain technologically competitive while promoting regional economic development and addressing the needs of public and non-profit organizations, private enterprise, and individual residents.

Over the next two years, cost and service availability negotiations would take place with US West and a consulting organization (Media Management Services, Inc.) would prepare a Telecommunications Strategy and Plan (1999).

In February of 1998, the State of Colorado published its "Strategic Plan for a Statewide Telecommunications Infrastructure, one goal of which was the "establishment of a Community Incentive Funding Program to enable communities to aggregate local demand and assist them in connecting to the statewide telecommunications infrastructure." (p.3) The 'Community Incentive Funding' requirement of the Strategic Plan became the basis of the legislation which established the Beanpole Project and its funding.

Also in June of 1999, Moffat and Rio Blanco County began to consider an intergovernmental agreement to build fiber backbone from Craig to Grand Junction, agreeing not to develop local government infrastructure, but to encourage private industry to build. In July, Moffat County released an RFP for one DS3 for CSP and for "enhanced telecom services for NW Colorado." Among the bids received was a bid from a partnership of the White River Electric Association and/ UBTA, a rural independent telecommunications provider in Northeast Utah. This bid for services described the business entity which eventually became NC Telecom, the Northwest Beanpole project service provider.

Moffat county received a $600,000 Energy and Mineral Impact Assistance grant in 1999 to support the DS-3 connectivity requirement the Colorado State Patrol Communications Center. Moffat and Rio Blanco Counties each committed to $1.25 million of support for telecommunications infrastructure development, with much of the sum allocated for prepayment of services from a winning bidder (Moffat funding included the DOLA $600K). In March of 2000 the Beanpole Project grant award to the partnering Northwest counties of Routt, Rio Blanco, and Moffat added $1.375 million to the regional infrastructure development budget.

Timeline

March 1999, Moffat County receives $600,000 DOLA Energy and Mineral Impact Fund grant to help complete the telecommunications redundant loop to the Colorado State Patrol communication center.

June 1999, Moffat and Rio Blanco Counties consider an intergovernmental agreement to build fiber backbone from Craig to Grand Junction.

July 1999, Moffat County RFP released for one DS3 for CSP and 'enhanced telecom services for NW Colorado.' Bids received from MFS Technologies, US West, Amigo.Net, and WREA/UBTA Communications (soon to be incorporated as NC Telecom).

August, 1999 NC Telecom was awarded the State of Colorado's RFP to provide a fiber link for the Colorado State Patrol, linking the CSP communication center in Craig to Grand Junction.

October 1999 - The Beanpole Project releases its first request for proposals for technical planning grants.

December 1999, CSP contract signed (with NC Telecom)

March 2000, Northwest Beanpole project funding of $1.375 million is announced.

September 2000, Beanpole Project contract awarded to NC Telecom

October 2000, the Northeast Beanpole Project receives its implementation funding

November 2001, Colorado State Patrol fiber link connected

February 2002, RUS loan closed

August 2002, Beanpole Master Agreement executed

September 2002, YVEDC sponsors the NW Colorado Technology Summit in Steamboat Springs, used as training for IT and education for Beanpole participants. Development of a Technology Resource Guide at www.yampavalleypartners.com.

October 2002, fiber backbone 90% completed

November 2002, first data circuits lit

September 2003, completing Beanpole connections in the three counties, adding wireless services to Yampa, Oak Creek, and Phippsburg. Routt County supplies $25,000 additional funding to enable service to South Routt.

October 2005 NC Telecom files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, unable to service debt on an $11 million loan from the USDA Rural Utilities Service

April 2006, Moffat and Rio Blanco Counties sign an agreement with NC Telecom to preserve prepayment credits in the form of a 50% discount on services until prepaid funding is exhausted (estimated to be a decade or longer)

April 2006, participant services end two months before end of original Beanpole service commitment.

As of the writing of this paper (July 2006), NC Telecom is expected to emerge from Chapter 11 reorganization and continue as a service provider to the region. Long term impacts of the Bankruptcy filing and the limitations it may place on NC Telecom's future infrastructure development capabilities are unknown.

Outcomes

Measured by the three criteria for evaluation of Beanpole Community success noted above, the Northwest Beanpole Project was successful:

Was additional infrastructure built as part of the project to extend the reach of high-bandwidth connectivity in the communities?

Yes. New fiber optic infrastructure connects Moffat and Rio Blanco county communities with network resources in Grand Junction and redundant connection to Utah. Meeker, in part, and Rangely have extensive municipal fiber infrastructure as a result of the project. Routt County has improved network access in many formerly underserved communities, as well as upgraded capabilities in its Steamboat Springs vendor central office and service locations elsewhere in the county (as do the other counties). In the past year, Rangely has continued infrastructure development by installing conduit for future fiber installation in all road construction for 'water trunk lines.'

Has there been a measurable and lasting impact of this access on the communities?

Yes. The project has provided improved access to bandwidth as well as an awareness of its benefits and the benefits of aggregate development. In addition, both national and local research have shown positive economic development outcomes for communities with broadband access. Also, there is the evidence of the increased utility of network connectivity for many users. For example, a request for success stories of the Northwest Beanpole project generated this e-mailed comment about the Meeker municipal area network (MAN):

The Beanpole spawned an interesting development in Meeker. It helped us to form the MAN cooperative that we continue to use. The MAN (Metropolitan Area Network) includes the school district, county, town, road and bridge, CSU extension agency, hospital, and public library. We are all on the same fiber MAN with the front end located in our court house. The Beanpole helped reduce the cost of connecting the MAN to the MNT so that all of our agencies could redirect technology funds into paying for the connections to the fiber MAN (originally owned by the school district).
Now, as a MAN, all 7 techs meet monthly to share information, technology, best practices, and more. This personal networking has been invaluable. We also share technology costs such as purchasing antivirus in bulk as a cooperative. The county and school districts have split the costs of an e-mail server to the benefit of both entities. The school district received a grant to implement an Avvid phone system and, by placing it at the head of the MAN, other agencies were then given the opportunity of using this system which can handle about 4000 phones. The county has now implemented Avvid Phones throughout their organization. The county also purchased a device that filters out spam, viruses, and can block certain web sites. By placing this at the front of our equipment, all entities benefit from this single purchase. The stories of cooperative benefit go on. Currently the county is heading up a project to place a wireless redundant network over the top of our fiber.

It should be noted that the Meeker fiber optic municipal area network is largely the product of earlier work by the White River Electric Association, the local electrical cooperative and start-up partner with UBTA in creating NC Telecom.

Has this change been sustainable?

Yes. The improved telecommunications infrastructure, competitive services, and increased community experience with broadband will not go away. The majority of Beanpole entities have indicated a desire to continue service with NC Telecom, but they also have access to an array of many other competitive service options that were not available before the Beanpole Project.

Notable Outcomes

The Northwest Beanpole Project was the only BP project to leverage a public safety investment (by Moffat County Government) to locate the Colorado State Patrol Regional Telecommunications center in Craig.

It provided three years of subsidy funding ($760K) supporting 96 sites for 35 qualified entities (county, cities and town governments, libraries, schools, colleges, fire districts, hospitals, nonprofit public health agencies, and special government districts) in Routt, Moffat, and Rio Blanco counties.

It provided more than $500K in equipment upgrades (primarily routers and modems) for participating sites.

The newly built fiber infrastructure significantly extended fiber optic capability and access in the region.

It established for the State and the northwest region a redundant path to internet infrastructure in Utah in addition to the fiber infrastructure available along the I-70 corridor, an asset to the State and a protection of service continuity for the region.

It provided the population of Rio Blanco County one of the most complete rural fiber optic infrastructure implementations in the State, with long-term advantages for government, education, and health care services.

It was partially responsible for an acceleration of DSL implementation in the region by increasing market competition and bandwidth availability.

It provided significant cost reductions (greater than 50%) and improved access to high bandwidth connectivity to public users in the region.

It significantly reduced the barrier of added "backhaul" charges and other distance sensitive costs and technical limitations for network connectivity.

It sustained, through the efforts of the Yampa Valley Economic Development Council (YVEDC) and Yampa Valley Partners, a decade-long aggregation of stakeholder activity and attention toward development issues and consideration of economic impacts of telecommunications resource access.

It proved a market for state-of-the-art telephony and network resource access in the region, against long-held vendor claims to the contrary.

It has excellent continuity of participation. Early indications show a very high percentage (87%) of end-users continuing service beyond the subsidy period.

Infrastructure and Bandwidth Access

The most significant outcome of the Northwest Beanpole Project was its success in dramatically increasing access to broadband connectivity in the region. The average cost of T-1 connectivity in the region dropped to less than half of what it had been previously, and so-called “backhaul costs” were almost entirely eliminated.

The project resulted in significant build-out of fiber optic connectivity in the region, extending far beyond what had previously been available. Rio Blanco County is now has one of the most extensive rural fiber optic implementations in Colorado. NC Telecom’s fiber infrastructure:

Not all positive outcomes regarding increased bandwidth access in the region can be attributed to the Beanpole Project investment. Aggressive and well-run competitive ISPs, such as SpringSips have played a strong role in extending the awareness and use of DSL and wireless connectivity in the region. They, too, have benefited from increased availability and lower cost of bandwidth locally that resulted from MNT/Beanpole development in the region.

Due in part to the stimulus of the Beanpole Project and the CSP related investments in the region, there has been an estimated $15 - $18 million capital investment in telecommunications infrastructure upgrades in Rio Blanco, Moffat, and Routt Counties since the year 2000. This includes NC Tel investment, CSP investment, competitive vendor investment, equipment upgrades by participants, and upstream equipment and infrastructure upgrades to provide MNT and CHSDN services. More than two thirds of this investment may not have happened without the stimulus of the Beanpole Project grant. This estimate does not include infrastructure specific to cellular telephony, which in its growing popularity, also resulted in a significant, though unknown, investment in the region in the same period. Statewide, the total investment represented by grant funding, government subsidies, and government supported telecommunications development projects was approximately a third of a billion dollars in the period 1995-2005.

Economic Development

Both national and local research support positive economic development outcomes for the Northwest Colorado Beanpole Project. However, the Project cannot alone lay claim to a causal relationship between its efforts and any economic gains in the region. In the half-dozen years since the project implementation began, the bursting of the “dot-com bubble,” 9/11, the ongoing State fiscal crisis, and the impacts of the Iraq war on Federal programs and funding are all externalities which have affected local and regional economies in the State. Also, the Beanpole Project was not the only telecommunications infrastructure development activity in the region. Even so, there are observations of positive outcomes for the regional economy.

Just recently, an MIT/Carnegie Mellon study measuring broadband impact on local economies was published, based on actual public econometric data (principally census and FCC form 477). The study reported, “The results support the view that broadband access does enhance economic growth and performance, and that the assumed economic impacts of broadband are real and measurable.” These results were also obtained in a rural subset of communities examined as well. [Measuring the Economic Impact of Broadband Deployment; S.E. Gillet, W.H. Lehr, C.A.Osorio: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; M.A Sirbu, Carnegie Mellon University, February 28, 2006; http://cfp.mit.edu/groups/broadband/docs/2006/Measuring_bb_econ_impact-final.pdf ]

The Executive Summary of the report concluded with this line: “Broadband is clearly related to economic well-being and is thus a critical component of our national communications infrastructure.”

Specifically, the study found that communities with broadband access, when compared to communities without broadband access, in the period 1998-2002, experienced more rapid growth in employment, number of businesses overall and businesses in IT intensive sectors. Broadband communities also showed higher property values.

Economic Indicator

Results

Employment (Jobs)

Broadband added about 1-1.4% to growth rate, 1998-2002

Business Establishments (proxy for number of firms)

Broadband added about 0.05-1.2% to growth rate, 1998-2002

More than 6% higher in 2000 in zip codes where broadband was available by 1999

The study noted:

Broadband’s impact on the number of jobs and business establishments was particularly large relative to our expectations. While increases on the order of 1% may not appear large at first glance, the fact these figures represent increments to growth rates that are typically in the single digits. For example, in the overall example of communities we tested, jobs grew on average by only 5.2% between 1998 and 2002. Thus even a 1% increase attributable to broadband represents a noticeably large impact. (p.4)

The most important outcome of this study, however, may be it demonstration that public econometric data can be used to measure and track this rural economic development issue in future years.

A Local Study

Closer to home, the effects of such incremental increases in growth may also be seen in the shift toward what is called “Location Neutral Businesses” (LNBs) and “Location Neutral Employees” (LNE) in the Yampa Valley recently reported by the Routt County Economic Development Cooperative (March, 2006; RCEDC), noting a shift toward LNBs in the region. Location Neutral Businesses, i.e, businesses whose clients may be anywhere in the world, are made possible by broadband network access. These businesses do not necessarily have traditional physical business places such as storefronts or office buildings, and as such, are more difficult to track and measure by traditional econometric means.

The study estimated that there may be as many as 700 households (10% of all households in Routt County) that are either wholly or in part engaged in "remote working." The study notes that this is made possible by the accessibility and affordability of broadband in the area. The study estimated that Location Neutral Businesses (LNBs) and Location Neutral Employees (LNEs; people who work for companies located elsewhere but live in the county) contribute an annual $35 million to the local economy, generating $600,000 in sales tax revenue. The LNB/LNE sector is expected to grow, by one consultant's prediction quoted in the study, to 40% of the workforce nationally by 2012. [Location Neutral Businesses, Survey Results -- March 2006; Routt County Economic Development Cooperative; http://www.yampavalley.info/downloads/lnb_master_050606.pdf ]

Longer term impacts are can also be related to improved broadband availability. Rio Blanco Pioneers Hospital and Moffat County Memorial Hospital received DOLA Energy and Mineral Impact Fund grants in 2005 to upgrade their digital radiology systems, the remote uses of which are enabled and facilitated by broadband access, resulting in improved healthcare technology resources in these communities. The Yampa Valley Medical Center has also received DOLA funds to upgrade their digital radiography capabilities. Community College campuses in the area will benefit from participation in a new IP video distance learning system funded by an RUS grant to Mesa State College this year as well. Current plans to relocate the Moffat County Memorial Hospital to the edge of the Northwest Community College Campus will provide a fresh opportunity to upgrade access to bandwidth connectivity for that hospital. These are just a few recent examples of ongoing community benefits of improved broadband access.

In the Broader Context

Although the Northwest Beanpole project experienced the bankruptcy filing of its provider late in its implementation, the benefits of its subsidy and infrastructure investment remain largely accomplished.

Bankruptcy as a complication of the Beanpole implementation process was not unusual.
Four of the seven implementation projects experienced business instability, failures or bankruptcies during their tenure or worked with reorganized vendors emerging from a bankruptcy. One single-county Beanpole Project failed. The Sedgwick County Beanpole Project implementation, using wireless technology by a small start-up businesses, was able to provide services during the implementation period, but was ultimately unrecoverable business failures. The Summit County Beanpole Project implementation has endured a series of business failures, but the County has retrieved the assets and is working to identify an operator for the system. They expect it to be operational in the future.

Even though several of the communities encountered difficulties in their Beanpole implementations, spokespersons for all Beanpole implementation communities (without exception) reported positive outcomes for their project, one saying that the project was "one of the better things that the state has ever done."

Montezuma and La Plata

The Montezuma and La Plata County Beanpole Project benefited from the development of a 420 mile fiber optic network between Albuquerque, New Mexico and Grand Junction, Colorado by a broad partnership of rural electric associations. This project, called Pathnet orREAnet declared chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2001. It emerged from bankruptcy as FastTrack Communications, a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) that operates from within Qwest central offices in a number of southwestern Colorado communities. FastTrack is a subsidiary of the Durango-based La Plata Electric Association (LPEA; providing electrical power to La Plata, Archuleta, Mineral, and Hinsdale counties) and the Cortez-based Empire Electric Association, serving Montezuma county. Beanpole funding was used to contract for a 20 year IRU (Indefeasable Right of Use) to the fiber infrastructure, purchase of equipment, and subsidized connectivity for the project participants. Leveraged with Beanpole funding, city and county government offices and other participants have fiber optic connectivity that supports the use of state-of-the-art videoconferencing and VOIP applications.

The infrastructure has been fertile ground for service development. LPEA, and electrical cooperative, has used 'unclaimed capital credits' to support the Montoya Education Network, an interactive video distance learning service that links five school districts in the region. In addition to its support of sharing courses such as foreign language for high school students, the network is the most active in middle and elementary school uses of distance learning in the state.

In Montezuma County, the City of Cortez operates the Cortez Community Network (CCN) a fiber-optic municipal area network that has OC-3 (155 Mbps) connectivity, one DS-3 of which is allocated to supporting its Beanpole project participating sites, with a subsidy that is expected to last into 2007. The Beanpole project also is providing continuing support for connectivity in some outlying communities near Cortez. The City of Cortez Community Network may be the most robust rural example of municipal fiber optic development and connectivity in the state.

Otero, Prowers, Bent, Crowley and Kiowa

This Beanpole community, was able to extend its fiber optic network, originally built with $3.3 million of Connect Colorado grant funding in 1998, to government offices and subsidize use with the additional Beanpole funding. The expanded network is in place and operational, with the educational portion now known as the Arkansas Valley Network Association (AVNA) a 501 3c non-profit organization. The original network was built by SECOM, the telecommunications subsidiary of the Southeast Colorado Power Association (SECPA), the regional electrical cooperative, consisting primarily of 630 miles of aerial fiber optic cable mounted on the cooperative's electrical transmission towers and poles. The 36 strands of fiber optic cable, 12 were reserved for the use of Otero Junior College, schools, and local non-profit agencies, with SECPA keeping 24 strands for commercial use. With the addition of Beanpole funding to connect government agencies, county governments, and other users, some of the remaining 24 strands were used for Beanpole project/MNT connectivity. Today Otero Junior College and Southeast BOCES are providing a full schedule of courses on the AVNA distance learning network to school districts in nine counties.

Kit Carson and Cheyenne

The Kit Carson and Cheyenne County Beanpole Project implementation (once referred to as TRECC) provided subsidized MNT connectivity to its participants, some of whom remain connected via the MNT today.

Morgan

The Morgan County Beanpole project encountered difficulty with its RFP process and eventually managed to complete a fiber network within Fort Morgan, providing shared connectivity (at 6 Mbps) for county and local government users and the school district. Although early plans to extend the network to outlying communities such as Brush have not happened, the existing network is functioning well.

Sedgwick

The Sedgwick County Beapole Project was a wireless implementation that was provided by a company called EduQuest, which also benefited from another DOLA grant to rehabilitate a former retail property in Julesburg as a community computing center. The effort was ultimately unsustainable, probably due to the inability to support the level of staffing initially attempted. A spokesman for the Sedgwick County project reported the positive outcome of stimulated interest in competition among telecommunications providers in the county.

Summit

The Summit County Beanpole Project was also a wireless implementation initially contracted to a company called NetBeam. When NetBeam and then its sister company Peak Speed filed for bankruptcy, the county appointed a trustee for the Community Wireless effort, but service problems in the fall of 2005 resulted in the county stepping in to retrieve the assets and seek a new operator. The county expects a new operator to be in place and services to be available in the coming year.
Overall, an assessment of the seven Beanpole implementation communities would report that four developed continuing and sustainable infrastructure that extended the impact of the MNT in their areas; one provided access to improved, more affordable bandwidth access (Kit Carson and Cheyenne Counties); and two provided improved bandwidth access during their implementation periods but for business reasons did not result in a sustainable resource for their communities.

A state official involved with Beanpole Project oversight indicated that the more successful projects generally had very strong community leadership with skills in bringing diverse groups together to further the project. When project leadership was handed over to start up companies looking to build their companies, projects didn't fare so well. Also, DOLA staff were generally deferential to local decision-making by the BP communities, even when they had doubts and concerns about the decisions. Any future effort should be more prescriptive, based on what has been learned from the more successful projects, he recommended.

The "Beanpole -- Addressing Last Mile Access" chapter of the MNT Final Report noted several lessons learned, including (ellipses supplied):

The statutory requirement for connectivity to the state-operated MNT has both positive and negative aspects…Its ability to process and, on a long-term basis, provide appropriate customer service to an expanded customer base is, as yet, unproven. The limitations on expanding staff resources for the state-operated system while expanding the customer base significantly will be challenging.

setting up collaboratively but separately administered project in DPA and DoLA proved to be a detriment to efficiency and timeliness.

There was inadequate recognition of the demands that extending MNT service to a new large customer base would entail. Successes did not emerge until state agency connectivity was largely achieved and available resources could be redirected to focus on non-state customers, including Beanpole communities.

The Beanpole process worked the best in communities where a large local/regional technology competent public office was located. This could involve a larger general-purpose government with an information technology program, a community college with a sophisticated information technology director or some other key actor. The on-site and on-going presence of local technically skilled IT professionals was a significant factor in achieving progress.

A 2002 State audit of the Beanpole Project, sparked by concerns about the slow pace of implementation and concern for community benefit, recorded the mistaken judgement of assuming the program could be started and run in parallel with the MNT implementation. Actually, the Beanpole Project was started significantly in advance of the MNT implementation. The audit also noted the administrative error of failing to staff technical support and failing to establish an administrative coordination between the two programs.

A primary concern of the audit was early payments of the grant funds, which in many instances then took up to two years or longer before service contracts were established or purchases made.
Unknown to the auditors, an early MNT implementation proposal would have established seven switch locations around the state (improving technical capabilities of local routing performance) each with a staffed local technical support center for the implementation. This proposal, dependent on a relationship with higher education to support the regional centers, was dropped in favor of a smaller number of switches that would be easier and less costly to manage and make secure.

The May 2002 State audit concluded:

Coordination and communication problems between the beanpole project and the MNT have existed since the beginning of the Beanpole Project. These problems have impacted the overall success of the Beanpole Project by delaying the ability of local communities to connect to the MNT. The Beanpole Project began awarding grants to communities a full year prior to the development of the MNT. As a result, several Beanpole grant recipients were ready to enter the implementation phase long before the MNT capability existed in their area. In addition, only in the last six months has the Division of Information Technologies MNT Program Office assigned staff to aid local communities in solving the technical problems that prevented their connection to the MNT. Our work indicates that having state employees dedicated to assisting local communities has helped some beanpole recipients move toward the final goal of connecting to the MNT. [p.3, Beanpole Telecommunications Project Performance Audit, May 2002; Office of the State Auditor, State of Colorado)

The audit report is probably the best history and summary of the problems in execution and coordination experienced by the DOLA, PDP/DOIT, and the communities in the program implementation. Future efforts will benefit from attention to its observations and conclusions.

Summary

The direct dollar benefit of the Northwest Beanpole project funding was more than $700,000 in subsidized access to greater bandwidth by the project's 96 end users and more than $500,000 in connectivity equipment upgrades. Together with connectivity funding from Moffat and Rio Blanco Counties, the project leveraged infrastructure investment for the region measured in the tens of millions. The project was one of the more successful Beanpole Project implementations, distinguished by its collaborative planning and administration.

While the actual economic development benefit to the region is difficult to identify in general economic statistics of the communities, both national and local research have recently noted positive economic development results for community bandwidth access.
Historically, the region was well prepared for the opportunity of the Beanpole Project and made good use of it.

As a closing observation, this assessment shows that continuing preparedness and attention to telecommunications development issues is necessary if future development benefits are to be assured. The most successful Beanpole communities were those with project and planning experience in place. The YVEDC should continue to address telecommunications development as a core issue for the economic future of the three counties.

The future of the MNT and DOLA involvement in rural telecommunications development is not clear. It is questionable whether the MNT will ever again be a factor in rural telecom service development. Many compromises in its implementation have never been acknowledged or addressed. Its early pricing advantage has disappeared and its increasingly restrictive security policies have driven away many users. The MNT also has never resolved its failure to deal with rural independent telephone companies as extenders of its services. As a result, many rural communities remain at a disadvantage in technology access. The rise of wide area fiber networks in the state (primarily by schools and cities) has not been accommodated by the MNT, and its relationships to other state networks, such as the CDOT fiber initiative, higher education's advanced network technology initiatives, and the judiciary appear to remain distant. The MNT's future may be as a network service provider solely to state agency clients.

The recent energy development boom has generated an increase of Energy and Mineral Impact funding for DOLA (one of the sources of the original Beanpole funding). However, DOLA still lacks technical expertise on its staff to provide rural telecommunications development assistance at the level it provides to its more traditional infrastructure issues such as water system upgrades.

Future infrastructure development initiatives in the State can find documentation of the many lessons learned about rural telecom infrastructure development in the MNT final report, its annual reports, and the 2002 State Audit of the Beanpole Program. The world is different now and the planning that resulted in the Beanpole Project is almost a decade in the past. The resource environment has changed, the technology has advanced, and subsequent telecommunications-related legislation such as SB-152 of 2005 (Concerning Local Government Competition in the Provision of Specified Communication Services), a bill limiting government entity participation in telecommunications development, has established new protections of commercial vendor business interests. Any new development initiative or a renewed Beanpole phase II would have to adjust to this new environment.

This assessment of the Beanpole Project outcome for Northwest Colorado must acknowledge that DOLA and the MNT, however flawed their implementation of the program may have been, did provide significant advantages and opportunities to the participating communities. The State of Colorado should note the many positive outcomes of the Beanpole development effort in any future programs planning for rural development assistance. Communities that have not yet received telecommunications development assistance should find encouragement in this history and the following "Success Factors."

Success Factors

"Chance favors the prepared mind." Telecommunications infrastructure development favors the prepared community. Is a community regularly addressing telecommunications infrastructure in a public setting via a task force, committee, or meeting of elected officials?

Regular attention to the topic of telecommunications infrastructure development by community groups also helps develop understanding of technology and spread awareness of developmental issues and potential remedies.

Historically, successful communities have fared best in areas where there has been involvement of local/regional stakeholders such as electrical cooperatives that have infrastructure development capabilities and mutual interests.

Funding opportunities come earliest to initiatives that have documentation of early and ongoing planning on telecommunications development issues.

Apply for grants/participation in State programs of any size as often as possible to gain experience with grant projects and participation (and visibility) in state initiatives.

Where collaborations exist, document and expand them; where they do not exist, develop them. A history of collaboration is one of the success factors of wide area development projects.

Identify and support or develop knowledgeable political leadership (community, regional, and state level champions for development investment).

Take risks. Risk taking or progressive behavior by local governments was one of the fundamental success factors of the Beanpole implementation communities.

NW Beanpole Project Participants

The NW Colorado Beanpole Project provided a total of 96 beanpole service connections to 35 qualified governmental entities. Participating entities included counties, cities and towns, libraries, schools, colleges, fire districts, hospitals, nonprofit public health agencies, and special government districts in Routt, Moffat, and Rio Blanco counties: